and many more benefits!

Find us on Facebook

GMAT Club Timer Informer

Hi GMATClubber!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509. It cannot have been painted earlier than 1507 because one of its central figures carries a coin that was not minted until that year. It cannot have been painted after 1509 because it contains a pigment that Michelangelo is known to have abandoned when a cheaper alternative became available in that year.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A) No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.

B) Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years.

C) The coin depicted in the painting was known to general public in 1507.

D) The wooden panel on which the painting was executed cannot be tested accurately for age.

E) Michelangelo's painting style did not change between 1507 and 1509.

Clearly the author assumes that Michelangelo didnot work on the painting for years.
If we assume that Michelangelo worked for years on that painting then there is a high probability that he would be using the same pigments.

The statement are saying that the picture was completed from 1507 to 1509. But it is possible that the picture was started in 1507, and the coin was drawn and the pigment was used, and be finished in 1510.
So, the assumption is necessary that the picture don't go over a year unfinished. _________________

Jayanak, how could it be B? The passage clearly says that the painter worked on the painting between 1507 and 1509. How is it possible that M'Angelo didn't work on it over a course of several years. If B is true, then it means that we should have seen the cheaper pigment on the painting. _________________

for every person who doesn't try because he is
afraid of loosing , there is another person who
keeps making mistakes and succeeds..

'A' says that "No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509". The question is not whether there were any stocks of the pigment available after 1509, it is whether michaelangelo used it or not. And the CR says that "it is known that MA did not use this pigment after 1509".

If the coin was not known to general public in 1507 and let's say it came to be known (even though by some means we now know that the coin was actually minted in 1507) in 1508, then the painting would have been pegged to have been drawn anytime in or after 1508 because prior to that there would have been no knowledge of the coin.

The point therefore is that the fact that the coin was known to general public in 1507 (the year it was minted) becomes a crucial LINK in pegging the time period in which the painting was drawn.

A. The negation of this does not affect the argument. The availability or unavailability of the pigment is not assumed as it is stated that Michelangelo abandoned the pigment for a cheaper one.

B. Again the reasoning provided by Jay is based on pigments which were abandoned. I feel the negation of this argument does not rattle the argument.

C. Negate this statement and the argument falls apart. If the coins were not known to general public in 1507 it means the painting would have been completed after a later date date than 1507 when the coins became well know to the public.

The think the reasoning for this argument can be broken down to the following:

The author should be assuming somthing while determining the two years. The basis of it is coins and the cheaper pigment alternative. Thus, the assumption has to be based on these two. Either the coins were known to general public in 1507 or the cheaper alternative pigment was quite popular and able to produce the same effect as the pigment used earlier.

Yes, it is an assumption, but in comparison to other unexplainable choices of A, B, D and E, it explains the argument in a better way. Even if you dont negate, assuming that the general public knew about the coin makes it more plausible that Michelangelo knew about the coin and so painted it. In other words is stamps the fact that the painting was completed sometime after 1507.

However not considering C as a possibility, A and B still dont seem appealing to me when in fact the emphasis is on the cheaper pigment rather than on the pigment which was abandoned. The abandoned pigment still continued to exist but a cheaper alternative was chosen over it. Moreover, option B only states that "Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years". He may or may not have worked on the painting for many years. It does not affect the argument in any way, since the argument is only determining the end date of the painting based on the introduction of coins and the introduction of the cheaper pigment.

the OA is B. This question is from MGMAT's GMAT test 2. The OE is attached below:

The correct answer is B.

The conclusion of the argument is that Michelangelo must have completed the painting between 1507 and 1509. The basis for that claim is that the painting depicts a coin that did not exist before 1507 and that it contains a pigment that Michelangelo ceased using in 1509. We are asked to find an assumption that completes the logic of this argument.

Choice A is incorrect. We do not need to assume that no stocks of the pigment existed after 1509. The argument is concerned only with the year in which Michelangelo stopped using the pigment.

Choice B is correct. In order to conclude that the painting must have been completed before 1509 on the basis of the pigment, we must assume that he did not begin the painting before 1509 using the old pigment and complete the painting after 1509 with the new pigment.

Choice C is incorrect. The fact that the general public knew of the coin in 1507 is irrelevant to the conclusion.

Choice D is incorrect. The fact that the panel cannot be tested for age does not relate to either the coin or the pigment, the two bases for the conclusion.

Choice E is incorrect. Whether Michelangelo's painting style changed during this period does not relate to either the coin or the pigment. _________________

for every person who doesn't try because he is
afraid of loosing , there is another person who
keeps making mistakes and succeeds..

"In order to conclude that the painting must have been completed before 1509 on the basis of the pigment, we must assume that he did not begin the painting before 1509 using the old pigment and complete the painting after 1509 with the new pigment."

He could have started the painting several years before 1507, could have painted the coin in 1507 and completed the painting in 1509 before he stopped using the old pigment.

Jayanak, how could it be B? The passage clearly says that the painter worked on the painting between 1507 and 1509. How is it possible that M'Angelo didn't work on it over a course of several years. If B is true, then it means that we should have seen the cheaper pigment on the painting.

The passage doesnot state that it was completed before 1509..... it is the author assuming that it must have been completed.

I think both (B) and (C) could be possible assumptions here, but (B) is assumed to a greater extent.

With (C): Think about that 1507 minted coin for a moment. How could Mikelangelo have been so privileged to have seen, and included in his painting, an ordinary coin (there is no reference in the passage that it was a rare "collector`s item") that most laypeople had never even known existed?? Had Mikelangelo been a King or member of the royalty, perhaps so, but he was just a common painter during his time..

(B) on the other hand is very plausibile. Painters often take years to complete a single work of art, especially some of the their better known pieces. The evidence makes no mention that only the older pigment was used in the painting, therefore leaving open the possibility that both the new and old pigment were used in a combination to complete the masterpiece.

A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509. It cannot have been painted earlier than 1507 because one of its central figures carries a coin that was not minted until that year. It cannot have been painted after 1509 because it contains a pigment that Michelangelo is known to have abandoned when a cheaper alternative became available in that year.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

a) No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.

b) Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years.

c) The coin depicted in the painting was known to general public in 1507.

d) The wooden panel on which the painting was executed cannot be tested accurately for age.

e) Michelangelo's painting style did not change between 1507 and 1509.

A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509. It cannot have been painted earlier than 1507 because one of its central figures carries a coin that was not minted until that year. It cannot have been painted after 1509 because it contains a pigment that Michelangelo is known to have abandoned when a cheaper alternative became available in that year.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A) No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.

B) Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years.

C) The coin depicted in the painting was known to general public in 1507.

D) The wooden panel on which the painting was executed cannot be tested accurately for age.

E) Michelangelo's painting style did not change between 1507 and 1509.

A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509. It cannot have been painted earlier than 1507 because one of its central figures carries a coin that was not minted until that year. It cannot have been painted after 1509 because it contains a pigment that Michelangelo is known to have abandoned when a cheaper alternative became available in that year.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A) No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.

B) Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years.

C) The coin depicted in the painting was known to general public in 1507.

D) The wooden panel on which the painting was executed cannot be tested accurately for age.

E) Michelangelo's painting style did not change between 1507 and 1509.

I think B.
It's either A and B for me. D and E are out of scope. For C, it is essentially restating part of the argument.
For A, even if it still has in stock, MA can still abandon it.
For B, if MA work over a course of time and completed in say, 1510, the painting can still have the pigment. Therefore, the painting can only be worked on from 1507 to 1509, which is two years, not longer than that.

bkk145, I think C gives a different ideas than what we have in the stem. Can you read it again and C if you agree with me? and if you do then how would you elliminate C?

You know that the coin was minted that year from the stem. So it doesn't matter, in my opinion, whether the public know about the coin before or after. It is still minted that year. I guess I should have said irrelevant, not restating part of the argument.